Tuesday, December 8, 2009

Guys I outsourced my job today to cheap 3rd world laborer "John." He wrote some weird stuff but I posted it anyway, because I didn't have time to post my own writing because I spent all of the last two days furiously trying to wash off myself the horrible creepy feeling that this comic made me have. JOHN, everyone.

---------------------------------------------------

Yo, my name's John, but I've decided that today my name is Robot MD, because doctors get all the ladies and that's something to aspire to. If I weren't gay.

So here we have a beautiful little comic fresh from Randall Munroe's ker-razy head and...oh. It's um. It's not that great is the first thing I notice; it's kind of mediocre. The joke appears to be “What if Facebook were creepy?” and you know what? I agree with Randall that it wouldn't end too well.

1st Panel

We have Randall some guy sitting at his desk, looking at facebook while his projector shows us what he's looking at by projecting it on the wall behind him.

Guys, this is why we can't see this man's eyes, he is looking at the wall where his projection is. Maybe that's why we can never see the eyes of all xkcd characters? They're always facing the other way. So my first problem with this comic is, why is the guy facing the other way? I'd like to be able to see his face. So that I can relate to him. EVER HEARD OF THAT RANDY?

HEARD OF RELATING TO CHARACTERS?

Also, I'm pretty sure you can't text from Facebook.

2nd Panel

This is where the “fun” begins. Facebook starts to recommend stuff to do beyond what it usually does. Hilarious right? So the guy thinks it over and starts talking out loud about his feelings. Now, this is just plain inconsiderate. We don't see where he is, but I'm going to assume he's at the library where people don't want to know his problems. You know what? I don't want to know his problem. If I was there I would put some music on or something. Try and liven this shit up.

Oh yeah, and her profile picture changes in this panel, as it does in all of them. Maybe this is a little joke put in by Randall, that the stick man takes so long to make his decision that she is changing her picture while he does it. Or maybe the esteemed Munroe forgot how to use Ctrl-v, which is odd considering how often he's used it in the past.

Who knows?

3rd Panel

This is where Facebook comes into its own. It starts to convince this man, this vulnerable, lonely man that the only thing he wants right now is Susie. But let's be clear here, he only wants Susie's body. He doesn't want to complicate things. But in THE VERY SAME PANEL, Facebook says that life itself is complicated. Oh yes, and there's some hover chairs. I forgot to mention them earlier.

Anyway, we have a little picture of what the stick man and Susie should be doing. And...and I'm not sure I like that picture. For one thing Susie is quite low down on his body, perhaps she is inferior? I guess Randall got a lot of stick for making males inferior, but I think this may be too far in the other direction.

HOWEVER, this if Facebook's idea of what should be done. This is the devil's way of doing things. Randall thinks women should never have to be inferior. Only men should do that.

4th Panel

And here's the punchline. Nope. Hang on, I'll just go look at it again. Okay, no that didn't have a punchline, we just have it get slightly creepier. Although, to be honest, Facebook has just done a little bit of matchmaking. Without Facebook that guy would be sleeping alone tonight, but now he's got a bit of booty to see him through to the dawn. The least that guy could do is let Facebook see the fruits of his efforts.

Okay, we've analysed pretty in depth the individual panels, but it's time to get into the HMS Reasoning. I'll leave you with Captain James Swift as we approach the Archipelago of Themes.

Captain James Swift: Okay, everyone line up. Now, we've dropped anchor just south of the Ocean of Regret. What I want you to do is look through this periscope and see if you can see any xkcd characters running around on the islands nearby.

You lot can look through the telescope and I'll tell you what you should be seeing. Right now you should be having a peek at the Island of Unrequited Love. There'll be quite a few characters there, but we're looking for Susie. Can you see her? Good, that's because that's what she represents.

Captain James pulls a lever on the inside of the submarine. It begins to move.

Right, we're going past some more islands. If you can see there, there is an island that we call the Isle of Fate. You'll see Facebook there, as that's what it represents in the comic that we've just read. The bringing together of peoples for its own purposes.

Okay, now on the island on the right, we should be able to see the stick man, the lead character in the illustration we have just read. This is the island of Randal Munroe, because the stick man represents him. The only thing we learn from this is that Randall gets all the ladies, even ones he doesn't want.

He puts the periscope back in its place.

We've got no more need for that old thing. There's no more a salty seadog can do with island metaphors; let's go back to John.

Hey guys, I'm back, just got myself a sandwich. I hope you enjoyed Captain Swift's tour. Last point I want to make is that Susie is an anagram of Megan.

IT IS

===================Carl again. What the hell was that? I have no idea. Whatever, he still drew a picture of me arm-wrestling a dinosaur. Oh hey also, why did this comic seem so familiar? OH YEAH it's because this was on the front page of digg like 3 days ago. It's ok Randall! We know you don't use digg and neither do any of your readers so it's ok.

this comic makes me feel unhappy in so many ways. Why is facebook responding to him?

Ok that was hilarious, especially the parts with Captain Swift and his S-Boat the HMS Reasoning, I applaud your post John and people will rip it to shreds saying it lacks real criticism and other shit but they will still have to admit that it was very entertaining, something xkcd has lost over the years

The problem with this comic is not simply that it's creepy, it's that Facebook's "suggestions" aren't particularly creepy. This type of humour relies on (or should rely on) the reader finding Facebook's messages creepy, and R.M. taking that feeling to the next level - Facebook doesn't only know who you haven't talked to for a while, it's also watching while you have sex!

Unfortunately (and other people might not feel the same way as me, of course) Facebook isn't creepy. It's irritating. It's enormously annoying to have all those messages trying to attract your attention when you sign in, and to know that even if you click that little X there'll be another suggestion lurking behind it, or the next time you sign in. If R.M. had somehow captured that feeling and taken it further, then this comic would have been funny.

This shrine of everything anti-xkcd fascinates me! Yay! Even gone through the trouble of making the repeat offenders-features and everything. Interestingly, you're probably one of the most knowledgeable of the xkcd-universe.

I donno why this hasn't been pointed out before, but neither the last panel nor the alt text build on the momentum of the first three panels. It is as if Randal had a few separate ideas on how to build on the idea that "facebook messages can be creepy" and realized that none of them were that funny on their own, so he threw them all together in hopes for humor.

Well, today's comic is mostly unremarkable. "Haha, The Core sucked. Here's a lame pun for the title." Of course, Randall has made this basic joke several times. How many times is it now that he's parodied a movie or TV show by having its characters summarize the plot sarcastically? How many times has he made jokes about how Hollywood takes dumb ideas and turns them into giant Michael Bay-esque action flicks? Multiple times, that's how many.

Generic xkcdsucks member commenting on most recent comic:"He's done this joke so many times, like here, here, and here."

Who fucking cares? If it got so much as a god damn chortle of derision out of you then it did its fucking job. That's what puns are supposed to do. It's like that Penny Arcade comic that I'm too lazy to look up where one guy says to Tycho and Gabe "All you do is swear a bunch and talk about video games" (or something along those lines) and they mock him.

Everyone here treats the fact that Randall has done this shit before as some sort of holy grail of comedic criticism. When it comes down to it, all comedians have a wheelhouse. Criticizing Randall for putting a nerdy twist on an old idea or for making a bad pun out of a movie is like criticizing Chris Rock for making jokes contrasting black and white people or different types of black people.

Incidentally, the alt-text fucking sucked in this comic. I didn't see Core, but it didn't seem too essential to the joke because the movie title got the aforementioned chortle out of me.

Everyone here treats the fact that Randall has done this shit before as some sort of holy grail of comedic criticism. When it comes down to it, all comedians have a wheelhouse. Criticizing Randall for putting a nerdy twist on an old idea or for making a bad pun out of a movie is like criticizing Chris Rock for making jokes contrasting black and white people or different types of black people.

Yeah, but, uh, Chris Rock is a pretty shitty stand-up comedian. Just because Randall does something over and over and over again doesn't make it magically better. His "wheelhouse", as you put it, is shitty and lame. Perhaps a better comparison is "Criticizing Randall for making naked references and creepy sexual comics is like criticizing Carlos Mencia for making outrageously racist comments or criticizing Dane Cook for looking like a jackass and stealing jokes. That's just what they do, it's their whole schtick, if you get mad that they do it a whole bunch it just proves you don't get it."

Also if you can find a nerdy twist in 673, let me know. Unless "knowing about DST" is nerdy.

@Mal: It's a "The Core doesn't know how science works" reference, if that counts as nerdy.

Perhaps, but pretty untimely. Maybe it's just me, but I think topical humor like "Haha The Core sucks" is best delivered somewhat promptly. Like, say, right after The Core came out, or right when you put up a website about awful movie science. Not six years after the movie comes out.

Please tell me this was a joke right? This comic sucked, but this blog post sucked even more. Its pretty clear that there is no projector and that this is how Randall shows whats on a screen. Also, the library? I hope John is just trying to be stupid here... if not, well, he should never express an opinion again for fear of making the world a much dumber place.

As for the more recent coming (parody of The Core)...

@Mal: I agree, its pretty untimely. I think this falls into the category of "Randall was doing something and a Joke (we'll call them that for now) struck him." I.e. he was watching The Core and thought of a new joke.

However, I did laugh at this. The "bad science" part of the joke was dumb, but I thought two things were good.

1) The title of the parody.2) The subtitle of the parody.

Clearly though, this doesn't require being tied to The Core. Bad science movies where someone has to "go somewhere" and "do something dangerous" come out all the time. Randall should have put this on a shelf and waited for the next one.

Also, the other joke about "get our hottest astronauts" was dumb if only because its no longer funny to point out that heroes in movies are unrealistically attractive.

I'm confused. The comic simply describes the plot of Sunshine. It's not even really trying to mock it. The fusion of the sun has failed 'can that happen?' Yes it can happen, just not now. That's not terrible science it's just adjusting timescales for the purposes of making a movie

I read the line in the first panel as "The sun's fusion is faking", so that really made no sense (which the other 2 characters seem to acknowledge). Anyway, the joke would be more interesting if the first 3 panels made any sense after the pun "reveal".

I loved Sunshine, so the plot to their new movie is exactly like one of my favorite. This comic lost major points for lack of creativity on that bit.HOWEVER! (DUN DUN DUN)A well-done pun is a beautiful thing. So this comic, when combining the well-done-pun points with the fuck-you-you-uncreative-sunshine-stealing-hack points, comes out to a pretty mediocre comic.This is my opinion. Study it, for it is truth.

- The first panel's dialogue(though Randall's lettering surely sucks, as I also read "faking" the first time).- The pun itself.

That's pretty much all. From Randall's inability to make stick figure heads properly, to the corny dialogue in the third panel, to the relentless lampshade hanging... everything else ranges from merely sub-par to outright sucking.

And, for my obligatory art nitpicking: why is that the first panel has background(as much as badly rendered machinery can be called background), but it's suddenly non-existant on the second panel? My guess: Randall is lazy. Finally: third panel, the guy with the helmet... is that his arm doing some weird right angles, or that's something else that just happens to be juxtaposed to his body? What the heck?!

The main issue with puns is that they need some sort of context to work.

Of course, the issue turns to "fatal problem" when it comes to Randall.

Come on, poking fun of The Core? It's a shitty film, but at least it's better than Vista! *TA-DUM, PISH!* Hey, look at me, I got nerd cred by making truly groundbreaking jokes! So, yeah, this "fake trailer" format fails because Randall can't find clever, funny stuff to fill it up with. Though now I'm wondering: "Not on my watch!"? Is that supposed to be funny? Sheesh, if he just wanted to do a pun, he could have just made a fake film poster instead: no shitty contextualisation, just jump straight into the cheap humour, Randall saves effort, we save time. Win-win situation.

And yeah, I bet Randall did NOT hear of Sunshine, because mixing up Danny Boyle with "The Core" is sort of like mixing Stanley Kubrick with "Armageddon".

One should try to make the verb tense agree with the noun(s) - singular or plural. The subject 'food' takes on a plural sense as the object is rendered plural - 'tacos'.The verb 'is' should be replaced with the verb 'are'.Doubtless there are those to whom this is mere pedantic quibbling. To them I reply with the pedant's stock retort, "He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much" (Luke 16:10).

"I am told that printers' readers no longer exist because clergymen are no longer unfrocked for sodomy".

I lack the qualification for a printer's reader mentioned by Waugh — I am not an unfrocked clergyman. Although, in my humble opinion, I have the sharp eye, the patience, and the general knowledge needed for fact checking and proofreading. Send job offers to me at my email address.

Mal, if you don't like the type of joke he tells then you can read all the comics you want and it can be as well executed as possible and you won't like it. My roommate doesn't like metal. I can play Symphony of Destruction and Master of Puppets, but he's still gonna think it's shit. But the premise of this blog is, correct me if I'm wrong, that Randall used to do much better work. At what point did he have any different type of comic?

Aquarians, I'm pretty sure you're wrong there. "Food" is singular because our favorite food isn't all tacos. It's the genre of tacos as a whole. The genre is singular in that case. So it's "food is".

Wait, are you providing Symphony of Destruction and Master of Puppets as examples of, like, super high quality metal that would serve as a counterexample to someone who thinks all metal is crappy? God, fuck me.

At what point did he have any different type of comic?

Generally, the first two hundred comics or so were better. While they had at LEAST as much vomit-inducingly juvenile romance, there were occasional moments of genuine cleverness and expectations-subversion. Perhaps their subject material was the same. Except not, because he used to be more interested in math and science themselves than "namedropping random 80s films."

To be fair, it's not like the first 200 XKCDs are great. But they are fresher than the latest five hundred, they are a bit more varied in subject matter and delivery style (this is at least the third time he's mocked a movie specifically by having its characterize summarize its plot sarcastically, which is a pretty fucking specific way of telling a joke), and they exude the feeling of an amateur who doesn't do any better because this is just random shit he dashed off in math class when he was bored and an idea struck him.

"But this is STILL just random shit Randall dashes off when an idea strikes him!" Well, perhaps, but it's a very different deal when Randall is a professional who earns his living on the basis of this webcomic. I find it implausible in the extreme that Randall can maintain a disaffected casualness over XKCD, since it's his livelihood now. With a formal updating schedule, a more stratified canon of jokes, and the general death of creativity that occurs when you push a particular project too far, it's no surprise that XKCD has gotten worse. What's surprising is how much it's gotten worse, since Randall isn't even able to churn out mediocre copy by rote; instead he churns out abominable wrecked ruins of bad ideas, and the high points of XKCD are when he ascends to the mere mediocre, as with 673. Seriously, when the best thing he's done in a while is "Daylight Savings = Saving the Daylight" then that's not just coasting, that's drowning.

FINAL STATEMENT: Even if you were right and Randall has been doing the same jokes since comic 1, total abject lack of creativity is a vice in a comedian. Especially when the quality of delivery of those jokes has declined so precipitously.

I cannot believe that you lame-o's have a site dedicated to critisizing xkcd. Why don't you try and make your own comic and see if it is actually better and attracts hundreds of followers? Do you think that is likely? NO!

The critisisms don't even make sense, and their not funny. I just went through 30 or 40 of them and they are BASICALLY ALL THE SAME!!! People who read this have no life, and the people who write this have even less and are just jelous that Randall can actually write something funny. Maybe Randall has sex and humor and things in his comics because THEY ARE FUNNY and MAKE PEOPLE LAUGH, which is more that whining people like you can do. Is it that you don't get most xkcd's because they are about science? Or you don't get the sex ones because you have never had sex?

If you don't find the comic, stop reading them. I don't find this site interesting any more, so I'm going to stop reading it.

"I cannot believe that you lame-o's have a site dedicated to critisizing xkcd. Why don't you try and make your own comic and see if it is actually better and attracts hundreds of followers? Do you think that is likely? NO!

The critisisms don't even make sense, and their not funny. I just went through 30 or 40 of them and they are BASICALLY ALL THE SAME!!! People who read this have no life, and the people who write this have even less and are just jelous that Randall can actually write something funny. Maybe Randall has sex and humor and things in his comics because THEY ARE FUNNY and MAKE PEOPLE LAUGH, which is more that whining people like you can do. Is it that you don't get most xkcd's because they are about science? Or you don't get the sex ones because you have never had sex?

If you don't find the comic, stop reading them. I don't find this site interesting any more, so I'm going to stop reading it."

They (the stereotypical pro-xkcd fundamentalist) seem to understand that mocking bad films can be fun (653), but if you say one thing about their towally awesome favowite webcomic... Well, you're basically Satan.

So, am I the only one who has not heard of "Sunshine"? I was thinking this was more a parody action movie based on DST(which is a pun that caused me a moderate laughing, I admit), not another damned movie reference!

PS.: what's the deal with the suddenly freakish thick arms in that Slackerz comic? O_O

Pro Mole, it seems you are. But I doubt the movie reference to Sunshine is intended, as it doesn't read as if Randall was aware his idea was already a movie. So you're not missing anything, except the knowledge of how awesome a movie Sunshine is. (I was lucky to see it on the big screen - the visuals are totally jaw-dropping. The plot... well, the writing's good, but it helps not to think too much about the basic premise of "HEY LET'S NUKE THE SUN")

I've never really liked Slackerz. Referential humor is its stock in trade, obviously, but its other habit is taking marginally humorous concepts and stre-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-etching them out over the course of like eight hundred panels each comic. ::checks the link provided:: Not as bad as some comics they've done.

Wait, what's wrong with Master of Puppets and Symphony of Destruction?

Well, uh, neither of them is particularly great, neither of them is even close to being the best album by the band that made them, and neither of them is remotely close to sufficiently great to serve as an example of all that is good in metal. Which is kind of how you used them in your example, right? I mean, going with the whole "no matter how good whatever is, someone predisposed to dislike it will still dislike it" thing, it seems like you're putting up those two albums as, like, nearly the best possible metal.

Don't worry, the closest thing to metal that I like is The Mars Volta, which really isn't all that close. Metal bores me, yet Post-Rock(not implying TMV is Post Rock, obviously) is the fire of my loins.

I was pointing out that your comment was staing a fact that is inherently obvious to every single normally functioning human being in existence. In other words, it was completely and utterly useless, even more than a trollish fanboy post. There was no entertainment to be had, no real insight to be gained. It was unwarranted, masturbatory pseudo-participation in a comment thread that did not want, need, or ask for it. You are a fucking worthless excuse for a human existence and should probably mutilate your own genitals with a cheese grater as soon as possible to ensure that none of your spawn ever walk this Earth.

oh man, you guys, wow, you seriously envy the guy that much? it's like an ongoing compliment to keep attempting to fault his comic on every minor point. you hold him to a standard of perfection that he doesn't hold himself to. wow.

Hmm, yeah, this xkcd was pretty bad, on all accounts (being stolen doesn't help, either).. but then again, I can't really find this "review" that hilarious, either.. Nownow, I know this blog isn't about being "hilarious" as much as "THISMAKESMESOFUCKINGANGRY", but still, after spending the better part of an hour reading through some of the stuff in the archives here, it seems strange to me for you guys to find something like "omg-he's-writing-like-he-is-on-a-submarine" funny... Just my five cents, presented in a (I hope) not too messed up way, we swedes think we know a lot more english than we normally do :)

oh man, you guys, wow, you seriously envy the guy that much? it's like an ongoing compliment to keep attempting to fault his comic on every minor point. you hold him to a standard of perfection that he doesn't hold himself to.

"Holding someone to a standard of perfection" is not...not really necessarily a compliment. At all. This is really one of the more confusing attempts at "Don't you guys secretly LOVE xkcd and wish you could be Randall?" blather.

To be fair, I personally am envious of Randall Munroe, as well as Rob Liefeld and Tim Buckley and so forth. I really wish I could make shitloads of money without being remotely good at what I do, because that sounds like a pretty sweet gig.

Anyway the whole submarine thing seems like a weaker version of a Sonty Mick review so whatever.

And then finally, the current comic led less of a "lol guys the Core was dum" reference so much as using the Core to set the scene. But what do I know, I like XKCD sometimes.

And what "scene" is that? The "Daylight Savings Time" pun? The inadvertent re-creation of the plot of Sunshine? Yet another tired joke about how much Hollywood sucks these days bloo blargh make Serenity 2?

You are indeed correct - dumbarse is the proper rendering. I would, in the interests of accuracy, preface it with 'fucking' though (as an adjective, not a verb). One must fight the nasty juggernaut of American Mispelling Conventions at every turn.

First, most people here do a lot more in their spare time than rant about a comic. I, for instance, spend a lot of time writing, as well as working on various projects, mostly related to open government and free culture, but also involving social media. This is ignoring the things that I am doing for academia, which are essentially by definition not done in my spare time.

Second, you should probably pick one and stick with it. You can't say that we are horrible pathetic people for hating XKCD so much in the same breath that you say we're obviously just trolling you--that's internally inconsistent. Sure, arguably you could say that if all we can do in our spare time is troll idiots like you that we're pathetic, but you didn't say that.

No, you were implying that we need help merely because we are ranting about XKCD. Perhaps I'm wrong on this, but that would imply an assumption that we take it seriously, which trolling inherently does not: trolling is by its very nature insincere, intended mostly to get a rise out of people. In which case, if we are so obviously trolls, we've succeeded admirably! So thank you.

As for what is pathetic about it--I think it's a lot more pathetic to come to a blog devoted to discussing a subject and be so utterly appalled that someone would even think to devote a minute of their time to it that they insist on posting a little indignant, shocked post telling everyone there that they need to get a life and that they must have no lives.

That's indicative of a very unhealthy perspective on life: that anyone who dislikes something you like must be somehow psychologically damaged, and that if they dislike it sufficiently to talk about how they dislike it, they must be in dire need of psychological aid.

Then to assume that because someone talks about something on a forum on the internet that this must be the only thing they do in their free time is indicative of a strong lack of critical thinking skills. The posts certainly couldn't possibly take longer than thirty minutes to an hour to write. This is done perhaps thrice weekly, interspersed with other things, leading to, at most, three hours spent in a week--less than the amount of time spent sleeping in a single day, and probably less than the amount of time one spends eating in a given week--writing about this. And, as I've said, this is done during breaks from other things. It clears my mind when I'm writing and stuck on something. It distracts me from the tedium of research.

But even more than that, the assumption that because you only see someone in the context of doing X, all they ever do is X, is child-like logic. Merely because you only ever see your teacher in the classroom does not mean that she never does anything else.

Well while wasting precious minutes of "precious" life typing that, I'd like to point out I actually don't care.

I'd like to direct you toward the 'If' at the start of my fourth line of text.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but 'If' usually implies the case that you may not do this, but some people also may do this.

As for an unhealthy perspective on life, you actually don't know me all that well, in fact all you know about me right this second is that I'm a fan of XKCD, however, also some of the comics that've been listed on this site, and that I'm an absoloute jackass.I actually have an extremely unhealthy perspective on life. And hey, I'm proud of that.

On another note, I very much disagree that "critical thinking skills" include that of knowing about the internet...A five year old could use the internet.Not exactly "critical thinking".That's my opinion. Much more needs more thinking about, other than the internet.

To conclude - Child like logic? Well. Now it's my turn to decide what growing up is all about. Why should I be the same as everyone else, just because that's what others think best? :)

well see the thing is Mr. Anon 2:14 and 4:16 is that we don't know you and since most of the anons that come here do exactly what you did we just call it like we see them and do more or less what Rob just did.

So since you decided to call us out as people who have nothing better to do, what's to stop us from doing that to you? Oh we don't know who you are? Well gee I don't recall you stopping to ask us what we did when we weren't spending our coffee breaks browsing a blog for fun either, so why should we not make false assumptions about you?

"Well while wasting precious minutes of "precious" life typing that, I'd like to point out I actually don't care."

Who used the word precious?

"I'd like to direct you toward the 'If' at the start of my fourth line of text. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but 'If' usually implies the case that you may not do this, but some people also may do this."

See, here's the thing. When you say something like "If the only thing you can do in your free time is rant about a comic," you are not positing a pure hypothetical. That strongly violates Gricean maxims--most notably the maxim of relevance, which states, in essence, that "just saying" is never an explanation. You are implying that you think your original premise to be the case. You can argue that you don't actually think so, but you are convincing nobody. Except maybe yourself--I get the feeling you're good at self-deception.

"As for an unhealthy perspective on life, you actually don't know me all that well, in fact all you know about me right this second is that I'm a fan of XKCD, however, also some of the comics that've been listed on this site, and that I'm an absoloute jackass."

I also know that you accuse at least some people who disagree with you and voice their opinions of being pathetic. Which is indicative of an unhealthy perspective on life.

"I actually have an extremely unhealthy perspective on life. And hey, I'm proud of that."

Well, good luck failing in the future.

"On another note, I very much disagree that "critical thinking skills" include that of knowing about the internet..."

It has nothing to do with "knowing about the internet," as you would see if you read what I wrote. You merely did not stop to make any critical thoughts concerning what was here written. It's pretty simple here: you simply ask yourself "how long does it take someone to write something like this?" Knowing about the internet might give you a helpful frame of reference--you might note that professional bloggers churn out this much text at a rapid pace--but it isn't necessary. It doesn't take long to conclude that writing something at ten words per minute would be cripplingly slow, and even with that it would have taken less than two hours to write. Twenty words per minute is on the slow side and it would take less than an hour to write this post; thirty to forty words is closer to average and would take very little time indeed. The assumption that these posts take significant amounts of time indicates that you have not thought about your assertion critically.

"A five year old could use the internet. Not exactly "critical thinking"."

A five year old could use it but not understand it--much like you.

"That's my opinion. Much more needs more thinking about, other than the internet."

I agree--but the internet also deserves critical thought. Which is to say, everything that you encounter needs critical thinking, especially something which is a cultural or social phenomenon.

"To conclude - Child like logic? Well. Now it's my turn to decide what growing up is all about. Why should I be the same as everyone else, just because that's what others think best? :)"

That is the single worst argument I have ever heard for being a dumbass. So, congratulations?

See, the reason it is child-like is children have not fully developed psychologically. They have not yet learned to properly reason. There are fundamental errors in their logic, because they are not fully developed. You can decide that it is not necessary to know how to use logic correctly or have fully developed cognitive skills in order to be a fully functioning adult, but it is in the interests of society that you actually know how to use the squishy grey thing you have been neglecting for so many long years.

Oh dear. You want to try rephrasing that one? That is just an atrocious attempt at an insult.

See, I don't think that he is pathetic because he disagrees with me; I think he is pathetic because he is calling people who disagree with him pathetic. Also because he apparently thinks that it is entirely his prerogative to refuse to learn how to "think critically" or "use reason and logic correctly." The difference is this: there is nothing wrong with disagreeing with me! Plenty of people do that. There is nothing wrong with that.

Carl disagrees with my assessment A Softer World is an excellent comic. He has expressed this opinion many times! I do not think this makes him pathetic. Plenty of people on here think that Penny Arcade is terrible and have repeatedly said as such! I do not think this makes them pathetic. Differing opinions help keep life interesting! I have had many wonderful conversations with people who have opinions diametrically opposed to mine, and I have never thought they were pathetic for it.

What I do think is pathetic is saying things like this: "This is pathetic. . . . If all you can do in your spare time is rant about a comic then you need some sort of help." I also think it is pathetic to fail to think critically, or to use sloppy, lazy thinking, or, worst of all, to defend sloppy, lazy thinking as some sort of individualistic virtue.

The standards to which I hold others are the standards to which I hold myself--though I'm usually more lenient with others.

What you think pathetic is pathetic...And I very strongly disagree that the internet requires critical thinking.The internet is fun.You can make other people waste time typing up long posts, for your own amusement...... Hey what do you know.

What the hell is this?

Welcome. This is a website called XKCD SUCKS which is about the webcomic xkcd and why we think it sucks. My name is Carl and I used to write about it all the time, then I stopped because I went insane, and now other people write about it all the time. I forget their names. The posts still seem to be coming regularly, but many of the structural elements - like all the stuff in this lefthand pane - are a bit outdated. What can I say? Insane, etc.

I started this site because it had been clear to me for a while that xkcd is no longer a great webcomic (though it once was). Alas, many of its fans are too caught up in the faux-nerd culture that xkcd is a part of, and can't bring themselves to admit that the comic, at this point, is terrible. While I still like a new comic on occasion, I feel that more and more of them need the Iron Finger of Mockery knowingly pointed at them. This used to be called "XKCD: Overrated", but then it fell from just being overrated to being just horrible. Thus, xkcd sucks.

Here is a comic about me that Ann made. It is my favorite thing in the world.

Frequently Asked Questions

Divided into two convenient categories, based on whether you think this website

Rob's Rants

When he's not flipping a shit over prescriptivist and descriptivist uses of language, xkcdsucks' very own Rob likes writing long blocks of text about specific subjects. Here are some of his excellent refutations of common responses to this site. Think of them as a sort of in-depth FAQ, for people inclined to disagree with this site.